nationfandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Political Coalitions
__NEWSECTIONLINK__ Discuss your coalitions here! PL, LDP, CNP Coalition agreed? --[[User:Jeffwang16|'J']]•''t'' 17:54, December 28, 2011 (UTC) Confirm * PL = Yes * LDP = Yes * CNP = Yes Comments Just a note, this is kind of the wrong place. It should not be a subforum of Federal elections. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 19:03, December 28, 2011 (UTC) Uhh wow. PL just better be active. that's all I can say. Marcus/Michael Villanova 21:46, January 1, 2012 (UTC) James Torres doesn't have enough votes. Is anyone willing to change a vote to him? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:31, January 2, 2012 (UTC) I gave you a big fat juicy vote I did. :P Kunarian 14:50, January 2, 2012 (UTC) Costello still has votes in excess, though. :P —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:53, January 2, 2012 (UTC) Its the size of his party so far, 4 users! thats a lot of votes. I'm sure votes'll go around more if some of the old peeps come to chip in. 16:43, January 2, 2012 (UTC) CCPL After examining the party programs, it looks like CCPL's chances on getting into the coalition are low, but there are some possibilities. Party programs are quite close sometimes, while some are quite far :P We share approximately 20% with Labour and CPL.nm, so that ain't gonna work :P LDP is 40%, Positive Lovia is about 50%, CNP is about 60%, MCP about 70% and Semyon is 90% :P Well, these high percentages are of course mainly because of our economic programs, which are rather similar, and not our "social issues policy" :P Of course, other coalitions make more sense without CCPL, but we are open to discussions. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 11:03, January 7, 2012 (UTC) :: At this point I would forget Soical issues and join join a coalition with you on progressive Economic issues. Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:02, January 7, 2012 (UTC) I think CCPL is just too damn conservative for my taste. Marcus, the CCPL is not progressive in economics, I think they're more centrist or rightist. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:03, January 7, 2012 (UTC) :: true, i forgot to put the in that last post Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:04, January 7, 2012 (UTC) I still don't understand why conservatives have so many problems with victimless crimes... —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:09, January 7, 2012 (UTC) : Idk, as a future physiologist, it appears to be something with there genetics, but also shows that (and don't take this the wrong way) studies have shown, Conservatives are less likely to (and here's that phrase I kept talking to you about last night) process information given to them and overall are a bit not as intelligent compared to Liberals and progressives. Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:14, January 7, 2012 (UTC) ::I was processing the information, but it was not worth acting on because it was just undoing and insults. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:18, January 7, 2012 (UTC) :::Yeah but i was afaid you'd gone rightest on me Marcus/Michael Villanova 14:20, January 7, 2012 (UTC) ::::Lol. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 14:22, January 7, 2012 (UTC) @TM: You call abortion victimless crime? Surely there is a victim, but unfortunately he/she is too young to give his opinion. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 10:41, January 8, 2012 (UTC) :It is good to give woomen the right to abort. Imagine that a woman is raped, gets pregnant, and does not have the right to abort. They then have a child they can't care for. Mostly such women can't care alone for their child because of pyschic problems. They don't have a partner. Their parner has escaped to rape other women. And if the women gets severe medical problems so that they need too life in a care home, what then? But it should not be used when there is no need for it. I'm BTW not stepping in a government that has CCPL in it Pierlot McCrooke 11:01, January 8, 2012 (UTC) ::Then you've never read CCPL's party program. I'll cite: "We are not allowed to take human lives, only God may call people." But: "We do however agree on putting a limit on the euthanasia and abortion politics. Euthanasia should still be possible if the person himself agrees on having it done or if the family agrees in case of irreversability of a very severe health thread. Abortion should still be possible when the mother has been impregnated against her will. The mother should always agree with the abortion." --OuWTBsjrief-mich 11:11, January 8, 2012 (UTC) :::Yes, But CPL.NM also calls for allowing abortion in the case the women gets severe medical problems. At least abortion should be only 'vergoed' in these 2 cases Pierlot McCrooke 11:43, January 8, 2012 (UTC) ::::Abortion in case of severe medical problems is - of course - also allowed. Government should never pay for abortion, because that would give a wrong signal to the people. "If a government is allowed to kill, so are we - the citizens." --OuWTBsjrief-mich 11:49, January 8, 2012 (UTC) :::::And maybe it is controversial, but maybe we could also allow abortion in the case the prognosis is clearly showing that the child will be handicapped. However, to not create a eugenics system, the mother should have a CLEAR reason in the case she don't want a handicapped child. And the doctor must review it very carefully, in all three cases I have named. And BTW most people who are having these cases are very poor, so they can't pay fully. Pierlot McCrooke 11:51, January 8, 2012 (UTC) ::::::I think it is a very bad situation if children are aborted because they are handicapped. What's the next step? Keep aborting until you finally have a boy with blue eyes, blond hair and an IQ of 150? I know they are poor, but so is the government. We can't pay for everything. You could get an insurance if you want to. Government does not pay when your house is flooded, the insurance pays then. If you are pro-abortion and are afraid you get a child you don't want: get an abortion insurance. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 11:56, January 8, 2012 (UTC) :::::::That was I saying, the insurance will pay (parts of the cost) the abortion. But I don't as eugenics. And as I already said, the mother must have a clear and underbuilded reason to have a handicapped child child aborted. The doctore and some supporting staff will then review. Pierlot McCrooke 12:01, January 8, 2012 (UTC)